Yesterday's LA Times had an op-ed entitled "Work-sharing could work for us." What was unusual is that it was co-authored by two people from opposite ends of the political spectrum: Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research and Kevin Hassett at the American Enterprise Institute. The idea has generally been seen as a favorite of the left - Paul Krugman came out in favor of the idea last November. So this latest pairing is politically important.
As a reminder, the idea behind job-sharing or work-sharing is that people work less hours (thereby creating work for more people) and the government helps pick up the cost so wages don't fall. But as I've noted before, the program need to have one important improvement: training. Rather than simply reduce workers hours, we should use those "free" hours for training. So a worker might be on the job 10 fewer hours a week (to use the Baker/Hassett number of a 20% cut in hours), but will be in either on-the-job training or classroom training for at least part of that time.
This would have the dual effect: It would increase our human capital -- a major input to the innovation ecosystem. And it would immediately increase consumer demand as companies would use the funds to pay workers to take classes (thereby creating more employments slots for others to fill the working hours of those in the classes).
As I have said over and over again, rather than pay workers to stand in unemployment lines or stay at home, let's pay them to sit in a classroom.
As a reminder, the idea behind job-sharing or work-sharing is that people work less hours (thereby creating work for more people) and the government helps pick up the cost so wages don't fall. But as I've noted before, the program need to have one important improvement: training. Rather than simply reduce workers hours, we should use those "free" hours for training. So a worker might be on the job 10 fewer hours a week (to use the Baker/Hassett number of a 20% cut in hours), but will be in either on-the-job training or classroom training for at least part of that time.
This would have the dual effect: It would increase our human capital -- a major input to the innovation ecosystem. And it would immediately increase consumer demand as companies would use the funds to pay workers to take classes (thereby creating more employments slots for others to fill the working hours of those in the classes).
As I have said over and over again, rather than pay workers to stand in unemployment lines or stay at home, let's pay them to sit in a classroom.
Leave a comment